According to minister for defence equipment and support Quentin Davies, the MoD is entitled to claim Treasury funding to buy replacements for the lost aircraft. But rather than pursue a purchase on a one-for-one basis, he "hopes to go further".

Good thinking, and I like it a lot; just one small question. Given as Chinook crews are like rocking horse plop around the bazaars at the moment, who exactly is going to fly these things? Donald Duck?

The whole issue of "lack of helicopters" gets hijacked by airframe numbers, people don't consider the crew numbers required to operate said platforms. Even if we were to pull every Chinny jock / loadie from his desk job / teaching at DHFS, UAS or wherever, they'd still take the thick end of a year to get back to CR status again; and that assumes no further issues with the trg pipeline............

I am sure the AAC and the FAA are in exactly the same boat (pardon the pun), but will defer to those more in the know than I..........

Good thinking, and I like it a lot; just one small question. Given as Chinook crews are like rocking horse plop around the bazaars at the moment, who exactly is going to fly these things? Donald Duck?

The whole issue of "lack of helicopters" gets hijacked by airframe numbers, people don't consider the crew numbers required to operate said platforms. Even if we were to pull every Chinny jock / loadie from his desk job / teaching at DHFS, UAS or wherever, they'd still take the thick end of a year to get back to CR status again; and that assumes no further issues with the trg pipeline............

I am sure the AAC and the FAA are in exactly the same boat (pardon the pun), but will defer to those more in the know than I..........

Click to expand...

TBF I think this is always a factor, but assuming an intention to buy decision then one presumes this gives enough time for new crews/conversion training. While I am no expert either, one presumes that as long as it's a straightforward frame that purchased then neither the Apache nor SF Chinook cock-ups should be a factor.

According to minister for defence equipment and support Quentin Davies, the MoD is entitled to claim Treasury funding to buy replacements for the lost aircraft. But rather than pursue a purchase on a one-for-one basis, he "hopes to go further".

Click to expand...

Jam tomorrow? Another vague promise?

Click to expand...

Could be code for:

"We are evaluating an offer by Westlands to provide an additional 6 SuperLynx aircraft in 2019 to fill the missing capability gap created by the unfortunate loss of the 2 Chinooks in Afghanistan. We will be making the buy British announcement shortly before the next election."

"I must also make it clear that their offer of a non-executive directorship after I am left jobless after a humiliating general election loss is merely an unfortunate coincidence."

Normal proceedure should have been to issue orders for replacements of the two lost Wokkas but we all know how Labour thinkâ¦

Shortage of pilots? A lot of that is because we have an artificial type/pilots/service split I suspect. We have plenty of Lynx or Puma pilots who could be sent off to Americashire to do a type conversion to Wokkas if we were so minded.

A doubling of the current heavy lift force would be a very welcome development.

Normal proceedure should have been to issue orders for replacements of the two lost Wokkas but we all know how Labour thinkâ¦

Shortage of pilots? A lot of that is because we have an artificial type/pilots/service split I suspect. We have plenty of Lynx or Puma pilots who could be sent off to Americashire to do a type conversion to Wokkas if we were so minded.

A doubling of the current heavy lift force would be a very welcome development.

Click to expand...

Mate
What's going to happen with said Lx's / Pumas whilst these blokes go to the US on this hypothetical (oh and cost-free?) trg package then? Are they just going to sit round Benson / Wallop as ornaments? Or are we going to suspend the Ops using these platforms whilst the boys scoot off to the States.....??

And as for the "press more studes through DHFS" argument - it's not like Shawbury isn't working balls-to-the-wall just now, is it?

How many orders is a sensible number given current commitments and manning issues ? Should we have about 60 in total or maybe less? Perhaps 12-15 new ones ?

I guess the other thing to consider is that some of them have been around since about 1980 and have seen a lot of action in that time, ZA718 for example, so should a few really be pushed off to museums rather than get further refits and instead be replaced by new builds ?

Presumably these would be AgustaWestland built Chinooks rather than Boeing ones so they won't have as many cost concerns around the the exchange rate that would otherwise be the case with a US supplied airframe.

Since rotary wing airlift is clearly an area which needs to be expanded in theatre, should the RAF not be expanding rather than contracting? The MoD and Treasury need to take a long hard look at requirements in theatre, and seriously consider recruiting more crews and procuring more airframes. It's all well and good flooding more troops into theatre, but if you can't safely move them and keep them supplied, then they can't have much impact.